TO:
Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
THROUGH:
Talyn Mirzakhanian, City Manager
FROM:
Patricia Matson, Senior Management Analyst
SUBJECT:Title
Consideration of an Update Regarding the City’s Legislative Positions on Bills from the Current Statewide Legislative Cycle (No Budget Impact) (City Manager Mirzakhanian).
RECEIVE AND FILE
Body
_________________________________________________________
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the City Council receive and file the update regarding the City’s legislative positions on bills from the current statewide legislative cycle.
FISCAL IMPLICATIONS:
There are no fiscal implications associated with the recommended action.
BACKGROUND:
The Manhattan Beach City Council periodically reviews bills, initiatives, or legislation pending from other governmental agencies. From time to time, staff identifies legislation on which the City Council may wish to take an official position and potentially join other cities in either opposing or supporting specific measures.
On February 4, 2025, the City Council adopted the 2025 Legislative Platform (an annual process), which sets forth the City’s legislative objectives for the calendar year and provides direction for legislative action. The Platform includes broad policy statements pertaining to a variety of issues that impact the City of Manhattan Beach and outlines the process for the City to determine positions on legislative matters.
The Mayor and Mayor Pro Tem are assigned to participate on the Legislative Ad Hoc Subcommittee, as detailed in the Platform, to expedite decisions regarding the City’s position on legislation.
The 2025 Legislative Platform, contact information for State elected officials, and official positions taken by the City Council are available on the Legislative Positions webpage: www.manhattanbeach.gov/legislativepositions <http://www.manhattanbeach.gov/legislativepositions>.
DISCUSSION:
The Legislative Ad Hoc Subcommittee has authorized several letters in alignment with the adopted 2025 Legislative Platform. The following is the City’s position and a brief summary of each bill based on the most recent version of the legislation. It is important to note that bills may be amended several times throughout the legislative cycle and their summaries may change throughout the process. The attached position letters reflect the content of each bill at the time they were submitted, and some bills may have been amended since that time.
Letters of Support
Assembly Bill 996 (Pellerin D) Public Resources: Sea Level Rise Plans.
Bill Summary: AB 996 would establish the California Coastal Planning Fund in the State Treasury to help coastal and bay local governments to adequately plan for sea level rise. The bill would, upon appropriation by the Legislature, make moneys in the fund available to the Coastal Commission for local and state costs related to the development and review of local coastal programs and sea level rise plans. Further the bill would establish an early consultation with the Coastal Commission for coastal cities to receive written recommendations of what would preclude approval of a sea level rise plan. The bill clarifies that existing sea level rise information or plans may satisfy the requirements of creating sea level rise plans by 2034 (Based on bill text from 5/23/2025).
The League of CA Cities is a sponsor of this bill.
Note: The City would not be directly impacted by this piece of legislation as we already have a sea level rise adaptation plan and approved Local Coastal Program amendment in place. However, the Subcommittee approved joining the League of CA Cities Coalition Letter as there could be benefits in the long run if further changes to the Coastal Commission’s sea level rise requirements are contemplated in the future.
Assembly Bill 650 (Papan D) Planning and Zoning: Housing Element: Regional Housing Needs Allocation.
Bill Summary: This bill will improve the housing element review process by encouraging local jurisdictions to begin planning earlier and providing greater clarity and certainty to a difficult and complex process. This measure would allow local jurisdictions to begin the housing element update six months earlier than what is required under existing law; ensure that local governments have adequate time to respond to the Department of Housing and Community Development's (HCD) review letters, and require HCD to provide written communication that identifies specific deficiencies in the draft and text or analysis that HCD believes needs to be included to comply with the law (Based on bill text from 4/24/25).
The League of CA Cities is a sponsor of this bill.
SB 346 (Durazo D) Local Agencies: Transient Occupancy Taxes: Short-Term Rental Facilitator
Bill Summary: This measure would require short-term rental facilitators, at the request of a city, to provide the address of a short-term rental listing to a city, would provide cities audit authority for transient occupancy taxes (TOT) collected and remitted by short-term rental facilitators, and would require the publishing of the local license number and TOT Certification on the short-term rental listing. (Based on bill text from 7/7/2025).
The League of CA Cities is a sponsor of this bill.
If this bill were to pass, it would assist local jurisdictions with their respective code enforcement and business licensing efforts, respective to short-term rentals.
Letters of Opposition
Senate Bill 634 (Perez D) Local Government: Homelessness.
Bill Summary: This bill would prohibit a local jurisdiction from adopting a local ordinance, or enforcing an existing ordinance, that prohibits a person or organization from providing support services, as specified, to a person who is homeless or assisting a person who is homeless with any act related to basic survival. The bill would define various terms for these purposes. The bill would include findings that changes proposed by this bill address a matter of statewide concern rather than a municipal affair and, therefore, apply to all cities, including charter cities (Based on bill text from 6/24/2025).
The League of CA Cities initially opposed this bill but has since removed their opposition after amendments were made.
Note: At the time the City submitted a position letter, the bill was much broader and would have prohibited local jurisdictions from adopting or enforcing ordinances to address homelessness including imposing civil or criminal penalties on a person who is homeless for actions related to homelessness. Those actions included things like standing, sitting, lying, or sleeping in public places, or activities related to survival such as using a tent, eating or drinking, possessing and utilizing blankets or pillows, seeking shade, or other activities to protect themselves from the elements. The bill would have limited cities’ ability to respond to the homelessness crisis and restricted their authority to tailor enforcement strategies to their unique circumstances. Without the ability to use civil or criminal enforcement remedies, cities would have had no meaningful way to address urgent health and safety concerns or protect public spaces if the earlier version of the bill were to pass.
Senate Bill 79 (Wiener D) Housing Development: Transit-Oriented Development.
Bill Summary: This measure would require cities to approve ministerially higher-density residential projects up to seven stories near public transit stops if a city is located in an urban transit county or a county with more than 15 rail stops. While cities in nonurban transit counties, located within a quarter mile of specific transit stops would have to approve residential projects by-right up to five stories tall regardless of local zoning codes, limit the use of local development standards on the proposed project, and allow transit agencies to establish development standards in consultation with the local government on residential and commercial development on property the transit agency owns or leases within a half mile of a public transit stop (Based on bill text from 7/17/2025).
The League of CA Cities continues to oppose this bill.
The City reconfirmed opposition to this bill with a second letter dated July 10, 2025.
Additional Efforts
City Proposed Amendments to Density Bonus Law
The Legislative Ad Hoc Subcommittee met with Senator Ben Allen’s office to propose amendments to Government Code Section 65915 regarding Density Bonuses and Other Incentives. The proposed amendments are aimed at preserving local control over housing development. The proposed amendments will be taken under consideration by the Senator’s office to determine if they could be included in next year’s legislative cycle.
Confirmed Interest - Parking Payment Zones Pilot Program
In February 2025, the City was contacted by the California Mobility and Parking Association, as they secured a legislator to sponsor AB 1272, which would re-open a pilot program created under SB 532 so more cities could join the pilot once the bill was amended. SB 532 established a mobile parking payment pilot program that allows a local authority in the City and County of San Francisco, City of Long Beach, or City of Santa Monica the ability to require payment by a mobile device in a parking payment zone. The Association requested confirmation from the City to opt-in as an authorized pilot location, with no obligation to participate if the bill passed. Opting-in would have provided the City with the authority to join the pilot program if approved by City Council at a later date. While the City provided the requested confirmation, we were notified at a later date that the bill would no longer be moving forward as intended. The association may try again as part of next year’s legislative cycle.
Notable Events Remaining in the 2025 State Legislative Cycle
The State Legislature will reconvene from a summer recess on August 18, 2025, and each house has until September 12, 2025, to pass bills. The Governor then has until October 12, 2025, to sign or veto bills passed by the Legislature.
CONCLUSION:
Staff recommends that the City Council receive and file the update regarding the City’s legislative positions on bills from the current statewide legislative cycle.
PUBLIC OUTREACH:
After analysis, staff determined that public outreach was not required for this issue. However, the City’s Legislative Platform and any official positions taken on legislation are available on the City’s Legislative Positions web page as provided above.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW:
The City Council's consideration of an update regarding the City’s legislative positions is not a “project” as defined under Section 15378 of the State California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines because it does not have a potential for resulting in either a direct physical change in the environment, or a reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment. Therefore, pursuant to Section 15060(c)(3) of the State CEQA Guidelines, the activity is not subject to CEQA, and no environmental review is necessary.
LEGAL REVIEW:
The City Attorney has reviewed this report and determined that no additional legal analysis is necessary.
ATTACHMENTS:
1. AB 996 - League of CA Cities Coalition Letters of Support
2. AB 650 - Letter of Support
3. SB 346 - Letter of Support
4. SB 634 - Letter of Opposition
5. SB 79 - Letters of Opposition